What's new

DDG(X) Destroyer Could Cost Up to $3.4B a Hull, SSN(X) Attack Boat Up to $7.2B, Says CBO Report

jhungary

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Oct 24, 2012
16,076
377
15,588
Country
China
Location
Australia

Take a look at China's biggest destroyer, a $920 million cruiser that's said to be the 2nd most powerful in the world after the USS Zumwalt​


BTW: 055 costs RMB 6 billion. That is 840 million dollars, not 920 million dollars.
First of all, I would say 055 is the "2nd most powerful destroyer in the world" is debatable. There are several contender out there, Type 45, Maya Class, AB Flight 3 or Sejong the Great Class just to name a few, and then if this really do get made or RN do make the Type 83, that would probably be the second most powerful destroyer in the world after Zumwalt. 055 is the biggest of them bunch, but bigger does not always mean better. Otherwise Iowa Class would probably still be in service or have a successor.

Second of all, the price quote is lifetime cost, after that amount is pay, the ship would be said to be "Paid Off" by the Navy. Which mean that's the $$ amount that you have to pay for the ship until you deregister and decommission it. US never uses acquisition cost. They don't buy this destroyer for 3.7 billion dollars each, they are spending 3.7 billion dollars on this destroyer over its lifetime, that's the major difference here.
 

MH.Yang

SENIOR MEMBER
Jul 21, 2021
5,780
2
10,407
Country
China
Location
China
First of all, I would say 055 is the "2nd most powerful destroyer in the world" is debatable.
Type 055 is not the second strongest destroyer, it is the strongest. We all know that Zumwalt is abandoned garbage.

1st, China Type 055,
2nd, Korea Sejong class,
3rd, USA Burke 3,
4th, China 052D,
5th, Japan Atago class,
6th, Japan Kongo class,
7th, Japan Aikizuki class,
8th, China Type 052C,
9th, Britain Type 45,
10th, French Horizon class

Second of all, the price quote is lifetime cost, after that amount is pay, the ship would be said to be "Paid Off" by the Navy. Which mean that's the $$ amount that you have to pay for the ship until you deregister and decommission it. US never uses acquisition cost. They don't buy this destroyer for 3.7 billion dollars each, they are spending 3.7 billion dollars on this destroyer over its lifetime, that's the major difference here.
lie.

It is impossible to pay for the maintenance of any warship and the training of sailors in a lump sum.
 

Han Patriot

ELITE MEMBER
Mar 23, 2011
12,866
-36
19,173
Country
China
Location
Singapore
Type 055 is not the second strongest destroyer, it is the strongest. We all know that Zumwalt is abandoned garbage.

1st, China Type 055,
2nd, Korea Sejong class,
3rd, USA Burke 3,
4th, China 052D,
5th, Japan Atago class,
6th, Japan Kongo class,
7th, Japan Aikizuki class,
8th, China Type 052C,
9th, Britain Type 45,
10th, French Horizon class


lie.

It is impossible to pay for the maintenance of any warship and the training of sailors in a lump sum.
He is a cheerleader, what do you expect. Lol
 

jhungary

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Oct 24, 2012
16,076
377
15,588
Country
China
Location
Australia
Type 055 is not the second strongest destroyer, it is the strongest. We all know that Zumwalt is abandoned garbage.

1st, China Type 055,
2nd, Korea Sejong class,
3rd, USA Burke 3,
4th, China 052D,
5th, Japan Atago class,
6th, Japan Kongo class,
7th, Japan Aikizuki class,
8th, China Type 052C,
9th, Britain Type 45,
10th, French Horizon class

Sure, China China Bang Bang number 1. I love China long time. okay??

LOL :lol: :lol:
lie.

It is impossible to pay for the maintenance of any warship and the training of sailors in a lump sum.

That's not a lie, you just know shit about life time cost.

By the way, Training of the Sailor are NOT counted toward of the cost because you don't just train a sailor to just used for that ship, you can deploy them to ANY ship within the navy, if so, how does training that sailor count toward a particular ship??

Well, scratch that, you are probably just too dumb to understand the concept of lifetime cost.

 

zhxy

FULL MEMBER
Mar 15, 2020
1,161
-21
1,650
Country
Viet Nam
Location
Viet Nam
Type 055 is not the second strongest destroyer, it is the strongest.
In theory, the Type-055 is the most powerful destroyer in the world.
In fact, it may be the most powerful destroyer in the world. All conclusions are conjectures. The only way to determine is to throw it in a real fight

We all know that Zumwalt is abandoned garbage.
Zumwalt is not trash or a failed project. The interesting fact is that Zumwalt's failures were created by the American media system.

1 The United States tried to exaggerate the threat of the Type-055, claiming that the Type-055 was a cruiser because it was > 10,000 tons, but the Americans tried to avoid applying this logic to the Zumwalt.

2. Zumwalt is very dangerous because it has stealth capabilities, can bombard enemy shores, can also attack enemies with long-range missiles, it also has anti-submarine and anti-aircraft capabilities. But the US media only talked about the issue of shore bombardment at a cost of 1 million USD/cannon. They say very little about stealth, propulsion, radar, sonar, automation....

3. The production cost of Zumwalt is not expensive and the Zumwalt shell is very cheap, but the US media has exaggerated the price of Zumwalt up to more than 7 billion USD/unit and the shell price is 1 million USD/unit. These ridiculous numbers have nothing to do with the actual value of the Ship and Shell, it is based on a calculation: zumwalt cost = production cost + research + development. They ordered 32 pieces, then canceled the order, finally 3 were produced.

4. In the process of developing Zumwalt, the US has accumulated a lot of experience, developed new technologies, has many patents... and they can apply it to future generations of warships.

END. Sure. Zumwalt is not a failed project. The Americans have other plans. Not coincidentally, they are trying to fool the world, downplaying Zumwalt's abilities with too much negative information.
 
Last edited:

huanghong

FULL MEMBER
Nov 3, 2021
342
0
268
Country
China
Location
Yemen
Sure, China China Bang Bang number 1. I love China long time. okay??

LOL :lol: :lol:


That's not a lie, you just know shit about life time cost.

By the way, Training of the Sailor are NOT counted toward of the cost because you don't just train a sailor to just used for that ship, you can deploy them to ANY ship within the navy, if so, how does training that sailor count toward a particular ship??

Well, scratch that, you are probably just too dumb to understand the concept of lifetime cost.

The operating cost of the Burke class is 80 million U.S. dollars a year, and the operating cost of DDG(X) is more, and it must work for at least 30 years. $3.4B is definitely not a lifetime cost.
 

zhxy

FULL MEMBER
Mar 15, 2020
1,161
-21
1,650
Country
Viet Nam
Location
Viet Nam
The operating cost of the Burke class is 80 million U.S. dollars a year, and the operating cost of DDG(X) is more, and it must work for at least 30 years. $3.4B is definitely not a lifetime cost.
If its operating cost is 100 million usd a year. And continuously for 30 years, 3.4 billion USD is a reasonable number.
FireShot Capture 812 - lifetime cost. DDG X - Tìm trên Google - www.google.com Chi phí DDG-X Đ...png
 

jhungary

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Oct 24, 2012
16,076
377
15,588
Country
China
Location
Australia
The operating cost of the Burke class is 80 million U.S. dollars a year, and the operating cost of DDG(X) is more, and it must work for at least 30 years. $3.4B is definitely not a lifetime cost.
Well, considering according to Navy CBO (Congressional Budget Office) stated Zumwalt IS the cheapest ship Navy to operate, I doubt DDG(X) would be higher than the 60 million a year for Zumwalt on both direct and indirect cost.

Majority of the Operational Cost is crew salary. Because each crew are going to be pay at least 35000 a year (That's a E-3 salary) to the Captain's $110,000 a year salary (usually an O-6) let's say the average of a ship crew salary is 55,000, Zumwalt, having only 150 crew (less the detachment) compare to AB's 320 complement, you are talking about 20 million a year just crew salary on an AB compare to 8.5 million on a Zumwalt (You don't get pay more if you are deployed on a Zumwalt than any of the AB class destroyer) and that's 1/4 of the entire operational cost for the Burke Class.

So no, It would have been expected the operational cost is less than probably even Zumwalt if the DDG(X) have commonality with other US Navy ship. So this is totally within the range of that price tag for life time cost if you are talking about a 30 years' service life.
 

huanghong

FULL MEMBER
Nov 3, 2021
342
0
268
Country
China
Location
Yemen
Well, considering according to Navy CBO (Congressional Budget Office) stated Zumwalt IS the cheapest ship Navy to operate, I doubt DDG(X) would be higher than the 60 million a year for Zumwalt on both direct and indirect cost.

Majority of the Operational Cost is crew salary. Because each crew are going to be pay at least 35000 a year (That's a E-3 salary) to the Captain's $110,000 a year salary (usually an O-6) let's say the average of a ship crew salary is 55,000, Zumwalt, having only 150 crew (less the detachment) compare to AB's 320 complement, you are talking about 20 million a year just crew salary on an AB compare to 8.5 million on a Zumwalt (You don't get pay more if you are deployed on a Zumwalt than any of the AB class destroyer) and that's 1/4 of the entire operational cost for the Burke Class.

So no, It would have been expected the operational cost is less than probably even Zumwalt if the DDG(X) have commonality with other US Navy ship. So this is totally within the range of that price tag for life time cost if you are talking about a 30 years' service life.
this data of yours is very peculiar. If you follow Zumwalt's annual operating cost of $60 million and a 30-year working life, the procurement cost of DDG(X) is only $16. The purchase price of the Burke class in 2021 is 1.8 billion US dollars.
 

jhungary

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Oct 24, 2012
16,076
377
15,588
Country
China
Location
Australia
this data of yours is very peculiar. If you follow Zumwalt's annual operating cost of $60 million and a 30-year working life, the procurement cost of DDG(X) is only $16. The purchase price of the Burke class in 2021 is 1.8 billion US dollars.
Burke Class in 2021 is NOT the Burke Class in 1998 (Which I suspected flight 1 is the model you are using on your data on operating cost)

Also, Zumwalt is not the cheapest ship, it IS the cheapest ship TO OPERATE. There are a lot of cost offsetting those operational cost. Which mean if we are talking about 3.7 billion per DDG(X) you are talking about 2 billion per hull (With R&D) and 1.7 billion per operational cost, again, that is well within the possibility.
 

huanghong

FULL MEMBER
Nov 3, 2021
342
0
268
Country
China
Location
Yemen
Burke Class in 2021 is NOT the Burke Class in 1998 (Which I suspected flight 1 is the model you are using on your data on operating cost)

Also, Zumwalt is not the cheapest ship, it IS the cheapest ship TO OPERATE. There are a lot of cost offsetting those operational cost. Which mean if we are talking about 3.7 billion per DDG(X) you are talking about 2 billion per hull (With R&D) and 1.7 billion per operational cost, again, that is well within the possibility.
The 2021 Burke Class is still smaller than the DDG(X) and has far fewer weapons.
You mentioned CBO, and it's interesting that CBO's hull price estimates have been increasing year-over-year.
In contrast, CBO projects the LSC will cost an average of $2.8 billion, about 65 percent more than the Navy projects.
The CBO's estimates are larger than its FY 2019 report. Last year CBO estimated the LSC would cost about $2.3 billion on average per vessel, 30 percent higher than the Navy's $1.6 billion estimate. The report estimated the ships would cost $34 billion more in total than the Navy estimated (Defense Daily, Oct. 19, 2018).).
 

jhungary

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Oct 24, 2012
16,076
377
15,588
Country
China
Location
Australia
The 2021 Burke Class is still smaller than the DDG(X) and has far fewer weapons.
You mentioned CBO, and it's interesting that CBO's hull price estimates have been increasing year-over-year.
In contrast, CBO projects the LSC will cost an average of $2.8 billion, about 65 percent more than the Navy projects.
The CBO's estimates are larger than its FY 2019 report. Last year CBO estimated the LSC would cost about $2.3 billion on average per vessel, 30 percent higher than the Navy's $1.6 billion estimate. The report estimated the ships would cost $34 billion more in total than the Navy estimated (Defense Daily, Oct. 19, 2018).).

That's because you are talking about a ship that has NOT YET make. Budget overblown d exist, as I said, even Zumwalt IS the cheapest operating ship in the US Navy, it is NOT the cheapest ship to make.

This is from the article you quote

The service estimates each LSC will cost an average of $1.7 billion per hull, which the Government Accountability Office noted is the same estimated price for the DDG-51 Flight III ship and $400 million less than the Navy’s LSC estimate in the 2017 plan.

CBO estimated the acquisition cost for the LSC is 1.7B per hull, in 2020 budget, again this is in line with the estimate I said before.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom